Abandon All Fear

What nobody else seems to be saying…

Archive for the ‘Doublethink’ Category

[Science Factism] The Evolution Of The Octopus…

Posted by Lex Fear on March 20, 2009

…Or not, as it may seem, according to Oil is Mastery:

“These are sensational fossils, extraordinarily well preserved,” says Dirk Fuchs of the Freie University Berlin, lead author of the report. But what surprised the scientists most was how similar the specimens are to modern octopus: “these things are 95 million years old, yet one of the fossils is almost indistinguishable from living species.” This provides important evolutionary information.

Indeed: it provides information that none has occured.

, , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Doublethink, Quoteyness, Religion & Science, Warring Memes | Tagged: , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

[Legalities] Ignorantia Juris Non Excusat

Posted by Lex Fear on February 27, 2009

Gavin Ayling thinks the law should be written in plain English. I’d like to expand on his post. I’ve always been amazed at this legal principle that underlines society.

Since there are so many laws and regulations to follows wouldn’t many of us be ignorant until pulled up on one?

And yet how many times have we come up against authorities themselves who play upon our ignorance and ignore the laws meant to keep them in check?

It seems to me laws have been crafted as to cover every tiny possibility and remove as much discretion as possible for a judge to employ. I think an efficient and humanitarian society should look to reducing laws and regulations as much as possible – wording them so that they cover a ‘multitude of sins’ rather than every single little possibility. This would then assure people of (a) their rights and (b) their responsibilities.

For example, what is the point of having a Racial and Religious Hatred Act, a Protection from Harrassment Act, a Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act, a Criminal Justice Act, an Anti-Social Behaviour Act, a Female Genital Mutilation Act (yes, there is one), a Sexual Offenses Act, a Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act, a Violent Crime Reduction Act, plus hundreds of others I cannot be bothered to reference (but you get the picture).

All of the above acts deal with or touch on violence of some sort. Obviously we could say most reasonable people are not the violent type so many of these rules won’t apply, but this is just an example.

What this tells me is at least one of the following reasons,

  • The lawmakers are too lazy, or braindead, to check if something is already covered in exsisting law
  • The existing law was not good enough
  • The law was created for political expediency, not for genuine practical reasons
  • There is money to be made in lawmaking

Is not violence or harrassment against a black person as bad it is against a white person? A gay person or straight person? A child or adult? An immigrant or local? A man or woman?

Does this also mean that any minority not covered by this existing legislation is at risk from lawful violence?

“Your honour, I would like to point out that the man my client attacked is a narcoleptic and is therefore not protected by any existing legislation. My client was therefore acting in a lawful manner and I would request this case is thrown out.”

Would it not be a better society if lawmakers actually tried to include the widest possible interpretation when crafting legislation? Then, leave it for the judges to interpret and decide if a law had actually been broken or not.

What’s wrong with, for example, a law that states “You shall not inflict violence upon another person”. It would then be for a judge and jury to distinguish between a bloody beheading or a playful punch and award compensation and punishments on a scale.

“To make laws that a man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.”
– Elizabeth Candy Stanton

People do not exist for laws, laws exist for people and politicians need to get it into their head that society cannot be controlled or coerced into being happy and nice to each other, but most of us are capable of telling right from wrong. No-one needs to consult various regulations and acts each day before leaving their house to ensure that they don’t commit an offence. It’s time for better laws, not more laws.

, , , , , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Absolute Power, Bollotics, Doublethink, Justice & Mercy, Minitruth, Non-Compliance, Pharisees, Realpolitik, Tick-Box Culture | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

[Atheism] Probably

Posted by Lex Fear on February 15, 2009

I was really happy to see the atheist bus campaign get into full swing. God Bless those atheists, another medium for which they can use to rage against their parents.

I have purposefully held off from writing about it until now, after the dust has settled and things can be fully absorbed.

I’ll start by saying I also found myself disappointed by the weakness of the message. I would much preferred something more assertive, more disdainful of religion. Instead we get probably.

Funnily enough all sorts of speculation took place in the atheist blogosphere and fora as to why include the word. There were some rather feeble apologetics using such idioms as “intellectually honest”.

Since I had followed this saga from it’s inception and was following the commentary at The Friendly Atheist I thought I should help bring clarity to the perception of the ‘Christian response’ as well as information as to how probably got in there:

1) British Christians views on the signs range from ‘Meh’ to ‘Great! More opportunities to talk about God”.

The fact is the Christian religion is led by a man who was violently, brutally killed as a convicted criminal – Call it insane if you will but most genuine Christians see persecution in any form as a privelege and opportunity to stand with Christ and spread the gospel!

Through history, the church has done better in times of persecution and it will always.

2) There are a few who are weak in faith and perhaps new Christians, or they have lost their way and these will protest.. and when they do the media will always give them the microphone to broadcast their ignorance.

But so far the worst response I’ve heard from any Christian is that it’s silly. That’s it.

3) I personally wish that they had dropped the ‘probably’ and gone for something much stronger. I wish it DID say “THERE IS NO GOD”.. with it the slogan is very poor and really isn’t worthy to be considered an attack or something like that. (Also the excuse given to include “probably” has to be the weakest excuse I have ever heard- very stupid)

The proposer of this campaign – a Grauniad journalist – originally gave the reason that she had seen ‘probably’ used in another ad (see Carlsberg) and assumed it was for legal reasons. It’s not, it’s a nod to the British talent for understatement. Silly woman!

Must try harder.

Which was quickly refuted by a commenter called Aj:

The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) advised her that “the inclusion of the word ‘probably’ makes it less likely to cause offence, and therefore be in breach of the Advertising Code.”

Lots of people are getting this wrong, so here’s a quote. Lots of atheists don’t believe “there is no god”, they can only agree with statements like “there is probably no god, although I and others prefer “almost certainly” as it’s more accurate.

He went on to include a quote from Ariane Sherine (from a later article).

There’s another reason I’m keen on the “probably”: it means the slogan is more accurate, as even though there’s no scientific evidence at all for God’s existence, it’s also impossible to prove that God doesn’t exist (or that anything doesn’t).

Oh dear, how intellectually dishonest. He left me no choice but to quote the original article by Sherine in response:

“After that, I Googled Carlsberg and found this marketing site, which suggests that using the word “probably” at the start of the ad saved Carlsberg from litigation.” – Ariane Sherine, Atheists – Gimme Five, 20/06/08

Long before the article you quoted. They’ve given all manner of excuses since then.

And the Carlsberg Ad:

http://www.brandrepublic.com/Campaign/News/472122/Scandinavia-Great-nordic-conquerors/

“According to Jakob Knudsen, Carlsberg’s international brand director: “The Scandinavian understated sense of humour is an integral part of the brand’s DNA. If you take other premium Scandinavian brands such as Bang & Olufsen, they won’t tell you they’re the best. Instead, they let the quality speak for itself.”

Only America would produce, “King of Beers” or “World’s Finest” and market their products as the biggest, best, favourite, fastest, greatest etc…

This advertising (up until recently perhaps) would never work in the UK, but picture 2 blokes in a pub, one declares “This is the best lager I’ve ever tasted!”, the other, being British is likely to respond “I don’t think so, I think I’ve tasted better.” But if the first was to casually mention “This is probably the best lager I’ve ever tasted” then the other may likely agree with him “Probably.”

Typical MSM journalist, gets her research from an internet forum rather than the source.

Oddly, no-one then seemed interesting in arguing the point with me and just ignored my second comment completely. Not what you would expect from intellectually honest people but there you go.

Here’s a great quote from Lib Dem MP, Martin Turner:

Imagine that you saw any of the following advertisements:
“The speed camera probably isn’t loaded”
“You probably won’t die in a car crash”
“You probably did turn off the gas”
Telling someone that something probably won’t happen doesn’t stop them worrying about it. Quite the contrary. And, if the millions of lottery ticket buyers are anything to go by, telling someone that something they very much hope for is unlikely to happen does nothing to stop them hoping.
If “there’s probably no God” is the strongest statement that, on reflection, atheists dare to make in public, then they have moved a long way from the certainties implied in their name.

But my favourite quote on worry has to this:

“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?” – Jesus

As well as beating The Grauniad to the post by almost 2000 years, there’s something rather more elegant, meaningful and poetic than “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”, don’t you think (if you are being intellectually honest)?

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Apologetics, Doublespeak, Doublethink, Duh!, Laymans Theology, Londonland, Minitruth, Opinion, Propaganda, Quoteyness, The Love of Libel, Uncircumcised Philistines, V for Vendetta, Warring Memes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

[Unconstitutional Alliance] – Where does the Rule of Law come in?

Posted by BHudson on February 8, 2009

I’m having a state-the-obvious day, because (for want of another reason), not many people seem to be seeing things as they are.

I hold these points to be self evident:

  1. The UK has a constitution.

  2. The constitution is uncodified but partially written.

  3. One of the sources of the constitution is the rule of law.

  4. Hence, the government is bound by the laws of the land.

These are pretty simple, fundamental points. The thing is, the rule of law would not allow the wilful suppression of evidence relating to a torture case. So why does Miliband continue to pass off the UK’s spineless response to the USA’s strongarm tactics in the name of ‘national security’? Suppressing evidence is against the rule of law. The relationship between America and Britain enforces the suppression of evidence. Hence, the alliance is (on this front) unconstitutional.


As Crispin Black comments in the Independent on Sunday, the problem stems from the USA’s unilateral foreign policy. We can have a ‘special relationship’ with their government, as long as we don’t step out of line. “There is little cost/benefit analysis of our relationship with the Americans. And absolutely none about the intelligence relationship… We persist in an ‘intelligence cringe’ – the Americans know more, the Americans know better. Well, they did not know what was going on in Iraq… Quite why we should think they understand what is going on any else better than we do remains a mystery.”


In the words of Shami Chakrabarti, “Despite best efforts to shine a light on the grubbiest aspects of the ‘war on terror’, the Foreign Office has claimed that the Obama administration maintained a previous US threat to reconsider intelligence sharing unless our judges kept this shameful skeleton in the closet. We find this Foreign Office allegation … surprising.”

The bottom line is that by withholding evidence, both sides are implicit in torture, regardless of whether they were before (and I’m pretty sure they were). Yet another nail in the coffin of the War of on Terror that will no doubt have no effect.

Posted in Absolute Power, Doublespeak, Doublethink, Global Alarming, Justice & Mercy, Little Hitlers, Londonland, Minipax, Morals & Ethics, Opinion, Protest, Quoteyness, The Elite | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

[MAFIAA Pwn UK] All Your Rights Are Belong To Us

Posted by Lex Fear on February 8, 2009

Two items of interest posted last year on TorrentFreak and The Register, that I never got round to commenting on.

Both Cleveland and Lancashire police caught defrauding the music industry, much like those it has arrested in the OiNK case before. Cleveland particularly appear to be hoisted by their own petard in this case, being the force to bring prosecution against the OiNKers.

Meanwhile it seems that Gordon Brown is also embracing piracy, by failing to acknowledge creative commons licensing.

I’ve been wrong all theses years. The government understands freedom perfectly, it just doesn’t want us to have any.

If the MAFIAA succeed in prosecuting Lancashire Police, then we are truly approaching a state where intellectual property rights trump all other forms of rights we know.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Absolute Power, Bad Company, Civil Disobedience, Copland, Copywrong, Doublethink, Free as in Speech, Morals & Ethics, Pharisees, Untouchables | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

[Pseudoscience] Snowball Warming

Posted by Lex Fear on February 6, 2009

Watching news reports this week, it is appearing the man on the street that, as I predicted, global warming theory (uh, sorry, it’s a fact, because theory in science means fact… y’know like there is no word for speculation in science it’s all Feoryact) doesn’t have the ring of consistency to it as is being propagated, even before the recent snow storms.

Recent snowfall in the UK has perhaps helped the middle classes to stop and question something they are being told to believe in without question. The snowfall has managed to shut up even the loudest uninformed global alarming peddler, but it hasn’t prevented the more astute to start pedding two specific reasons, or rather, excuses for the snow.

The first one is an easy debunker. “Global Warming doesn’t mean it always gets hotter, it means more extreme types of weather!” Can anyone tell me what is so wrong with this argument? Well for starters it’s a catch all.. if you think about it, any type of extreme weather means global warming, hot or cold, dry or wet, delightful or devastating. If you’re trying to debate this logic intelligently you won’t win. Global Warming is essentially happening, regardless of the actual state of the environment.

The second one is this: Snowfall used to be much more common, but the Global Warming trend means that it’s occurring every 20 years (instead of, say, every year).

OK this is a bit more tricky, sounds believable right? But the remarkable thing about this argument is that it’s, like, almost dead on. We’re not talking about 25 years here, or 15 years, but we’re actually talking approximately 20 years. How are scientists able to predict this so accurately? Is it down to data provided by studying the global warming phenomenon or is it more like… the Zany Ones?!

Could it be scientists are stating 20 years, because, well, snow like this fell 20 years ago! A bit like if I told you house prices are going to rise this year because they’ve been rising since 1996?

I have one question for the Global Alarmists, if an unmoving linear Global Warming trend is happening despite record warmth, record cold, growing antarctic ice, receding antarctic ice, clouds affect data, clouds don’t affect data, we don’t rely on past data/history, we rely on past data/history, it’s not sunlight, sunlight fell in the Northern Hemisphere… can someone tell me how the heck we are going to know:

a) When we have succeeded in our mission to cool the earth down? and
b) If we actually do enter a Global Cooling period?

Perhaps if we start experiencing lots of freak heatwaves, this will be an indicator that we are in danger of Global Cooling and need to act fast to warm the earth up?!

, , , , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Doublespeak, Doublethink, Global Alarming, Predatory Systems, Propaganda, Warring Memes, WhatTheyDontWantU2C | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

[Economic Meltdown] Flash… Aah Aah He’ll Screw Everyone Of Us

Posted by Lex Fear on February 4, 2009

Overheard at a desk in a major investment bank today:

“This MP basically said that they’re creating an inflationary environment… 15% interest rates, not this year, but over the next 3 years”

Make of it what you will, personally it tells me that everyone in the know is aware of what is coming next and what is needed, but for some reason Flash Gordon and Alistair Darling are out of the loop or didn’t get the memo. It’s also becoming clear that Flash is intending to pull a Zimbabwe and start printing money (he calls this “quantitative easing” – which is another fancy financial bullshit term for printing money).

You see there is only two ways out of a recession, inflation or raising interest rates. You should know what happens when the government uses inflation, it’s been done before by the Weimar Republic and more recently Zanu-PF.

But what about the other tool, interest rates? Well, you see, this would cause millions of feckless, leveraged, mewing borrowers to realise the difference between debt and wealth – can’t have that, or can we?

The fact is we’re dangerously close to the edge of falling into hyperinflation and while its difficult to predict how disastrous this would be we do know that fixed loans would be eroded away, but so would the value of GBP, the value of any savings and investments too (you know, the things used to fund borrowing) – basically our ecomony would become worthless and most likely we’d all end up informally adopting the Euro.

So why does Flash want to print money? There can only be one of three conclusions, either he…

  • Has lost all sense of reality, delusional, thinking he is the saviour of the world
  • Is incompetent. He has no clue what he is doing, no clue how to manage an economy and has sat on top of the biggest economic bubble in the history of the world, taking credit for something he had no part in. Or…
  • Has engineered this, in part, on purpose. The most far reaching conclusion however I can’t help but wonder if he was hoping for a bust sooner, so that it would damage Bliar (and oust him out of office), or even, guessing (or feeling) he will lose an election soon, hoping to pass the bubble on to the Tories just before it burst (securing a short term for them, allowing him to be elected back into power at the next election). Far reaching but not inconceivable – considering all the warnings he has ignored over the 10 years he was Chancellor.

Whatever the reasons for his contempt of savers, the UK economy and the poor, all his actions are delaying the inevitable (and making it worse)… depression and potentially more civil unrest.

Posted in Absolute Power, Bank Robbers, Bollotics, Doublethink, Financial Terrorism, Minitruth, Pharisees, Uncircumcised Philistines, Wealth Creation, WhatTheyDontWantU2C | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

[Minitruth] Loss of Confidence

Posted by Lex Fear on July 6, 2007

This Post Is Rated: C for Controversial. Speculation over the decline of trust in British institutions.

In may, the Economist highlighted a YouGov poll taken earlier this year showing a general decline in the British peoples trust in public services, politics, work and journalism.

“…Confidence in almost every area of public life has fallen since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.” – The Economist, Trust Me, I’m A Judge

Unsurprisingly the only people to have gained more trust from the public were judges, whilst the usual suspects, including police, NHS hospital managers, estate agents, MPs and newspapers lost trust.

It’s easy to see why. I speak from my own experience in dealing with ‘the system’. People are realising that whilst those in authority seek more and more power over every detail of our lives, restricting our freedoms, judges are our last great hope in clearing our name and keeping society in balance.

Whilst the government seeks to speed up justice and skip past important checks and balances, the judge is a human being, our last recourse and hope for clearing our name and defending our innocence and rights. As the government have introduced more and more restrictive legislation, more and more British people have come to rely upon the courts to treat them fairly.

When are we going to have an honest, competent, open government? One that looks to the bottom line when making decisions and laws, a government that stands for integrity and trust?

I’m fed up of seeing pandering to the rhetorical right, unaccountability, cover ups, tax solves all problems, empty promisestechnology solves everythingmotorists are evil, environmental hypocrisy, weasel words, VIP treatment, cultivating fear, wasted money, not protecting UK citizens and allowing foreigners to dictate policy.

Posted in Absolute Power, Databases, Doublespeak, Doublethink, Fact Erosion, Global Alarming, Justice & Mercy, Little Hitlers, Minitruth, Opinion, Predatory Systems, Propaganda, Realpolitik, Smear Campaigns, The Religious Wrong, Tick-Box Culture, Wealth Creation, Xenophobia | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

[Ulterior Verse of the Day] Looking for Borders of Their Own

Posted by Lex Fear on June 10, 2007

“And they admitted that illegal aliens and strangers didn’t belong in their country. People who say such things show that they are happy with the country God has given them to protect. If they had been thinking of leaving their country, they would have been wrong. Instead, they were happy in the country they were born in. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared borders for them to defend.” – Epistle to the Hebrews Ch. 11

Apparently the Devil is seeking to undermine God’s country. And when I say God’s country, I’m obviously talking about America of course.

America is the place God has prepared for us Christians to go when we die, except we better have our passports and visas ready, or we’re all going to Hell with Europe instead.

That was all according to Utah Republican County District Chairman Don Larsen a couple of months ago. Unfortunately the original article has been removed from The Salt Lake Tribune but the comments are still there.

How many people on Earth walk around like they are carrying Passports that will get them into Heaven, while not realising their own ‘visa’ has ‘expired’?

Posted in Anti-Terrorists, Dark Side of the Light, Doublethink, Justice & Mercy, Little Hitlers, Pharisees, The Purpose Missing Church, The Religious Wrong, Uncircumcised Philistines | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

[Ideologies] Right-Minded Individuals

Posted by Lex Fear on May 25, 2007

This Post Is Rated: M for You will probably be Mildly offended. But you won’t be able to explain why.

A while back Bryan Ferry was quoted in The Grauniad about his comments praising Nazi aesthetics.

“I apologise unreservedly for any offense caused by my comments… I, like every right-minded individual, find the Nazi regime, and all it stood for, evil and abhorrent.”

I found it interesting he referenced right-minded individuals (no, I don’t mean politically). I find it interesting because it causes me to wonder, do right-minded individuals really find the Nazi regime abhorrent? I think to verify that, we would need to know who would be considered a ‘right-minded individual’. We also need to establish what exactly was abhorrent about the Nazi regime?

Nazism, defined by Wikipedia is:

I haven’t listed every single reference on Wikipedia (one hotly disputed section argues that Nazism was anti-capitalist which is a joke), nevertheless these are the main associations with Nazi ideology. You will notice that ethnic nationalism, anti-liberalism, anti-communism and nationalism are on this list. Strangely enough, you can find examples of large groups of people who support these ideologies alive and well today (particularly in regards to the American government).

So is it really right-minded to oppose these ideologies? I suspect that many ‘right-minded individuals’ were caught up in the Nazi rhetoric before we could look back in hindsight knowing it was all evil and abhorrent. After all, how else would Hitler rise to power if he was not charismatic and good at blending a patriotic and religious message?

Perhaps being ‘right-minded’ is not enough… or perhaps it’s not about being ‘right-minded’ at all. The problem with using a term such as ‘right-minded’ is that it can only be defined in relative terms. Instead of acknowledging what is essentially evil or abhorrent, we define it as evil and abhorrent only as long as the majority of what we consider ‘right-minded individuals’ find it evil and abhorrent.

See how easy it is to fall into the trap of circular reasoning?

Why am I making such a meal of this? Because it’s quite apparent to me that “I, like every right-minded individual” is a rhetorical statement.

It’s important for us to analyse what makes an ideology evil, and to stand against it as a matter of principal. We should not stand against an ideology simply because someone we dislike believes in it, or everyone agrees it’s wrong – otherwise we will not recognise true evil when it stares us in the face.

Posted in Doublethink, Little Hitlers, Morals & Ethics, Opinion, Pharisees, Propaganda, Quoteyness | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments »